Page 14 of 17 FirstFirst ... 41011121314151617 LastLast
Results 157 to 168 of 193
  1. #157
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    By the way, I was listening to Fox News this a.m. and Greg Jarrett had Craig Silverman on. I didn't see this gem on any of the threads here, but he said Hunter saved this indictment IN HIS SAFE for years. In his safe. He said the statute of limitations on what the Ramseys were charged with was 3 years. Jarrett asked him if Hunter get get anything like disbarred or anything else done to him after this and he said it was doubtful. Sounds like Lizard Tongue is safe, but looks very bad right now. Also, he has never seen anything like this before where a grand jury indicts someone and a prosecutor doesn't bring charges. I'm listening again now and yet another attorney is saying the same thing. He said he's never, ever heard of this happening before.
    I despise the Ramseys and this is just my opinion

  2. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thor View Post
    By the way, I was listening to Fox News this a.m. and Greg Jarrett had Craig Silverman on. I didn't see this gem on any of the threads here, but he said Hunter saved this indictment IN HIS SAFE for years. In his safe. He said the statute of limitations on what the Ramseys were charged with was 3 years. Jarrett asked him if Hunter get get anything like disbarred or anything else done to him after this and he said it was doubtful. Sounds like Lizard Tongue is safe, but looks very bad right now. Also, he has never seen anything like this before where a grand jury indicts someone and a prosecutor doesn't bring charges. I'm listening again now and yet another attorney is saying the same thing. He said he's never, ever heard of this happening before.
    Thanks, Thor, for alerting us to this.

    The major news media are NEVER going to tell the truth. They're leading and finishing with Poor Ramseys are EXONERATED!

    All we can hope for now is someone cracks. Either someone who knows the truth or who saw or heard something, whether it was about the murder or about the cover up which Hunter clearly was in on and dammit also got away with, SOMEBODY NEEDS TO COUGH UP THE TRUTH FOR A CHANGE IN BOULDER.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  3. #159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thor View Post
    By the way, I was listening to Fox News this a.m. and Greg Jarrett had Craig Silverman on. I didn't see this gem on any of the threads here, but he said Hunter saved this indictment IN HIS SAFE for years. In his safe. He said the statute of limitations on what the Ramseys were charged with was 3 years. Jarrett asked him if Hunter get get anything like disbarred or anything else done to him after this and he said it was doubtful. Sounds like Lizard Tongue is safe, but looks very bad right now. Also, he has never seen anything like this before where a grand jury indicts someone and a prosecutor doesn't bring charges. I'm listening again now and yet another attorney is saying the same thing. He said he's never, ever heard of this happening before.
    By the way I love how the upper left-hand corners of the indictment pages show that the paper has been stapled, unstapled, and restapled quite a few times. Copies to Woody, Hal Haddon.... I wonder who else?

  4. #160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine_ws View Post
    http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...-be?source=rss

    The DNA was not available to the grand jury in 1999," said Lin Wood, the Ramseys' attorney. "What we have here is a release of a sliver of the evidence that the grand jury looked at and reviewed. It's just based on incomplete evidence. "


    Wood said he is concerned that the indictment's release will appear to some to be confirmation that the Ramseys killed their daughter, when they have been cleared.

    "It's subject to the impression that criminal charges were warranted against the Ramseys. A full examination of the evidence unquestionably exonerates the Ramseys," Wood said. "This is inflicting a terrible miscarriage of justice."



    Oh, GOSH, Woody!

    I would have thought THE TERRIBLE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE was when a child was SEXUALLY ABUSED AND MURDERED and her parents OBSTRUCTED the investigation, LIED to LE and THE PUBLIC, and USED YOU TO MAKE SURE NO ONE EVER SPOKE THE TRUTH ABOUT IT AGAIN.

    But then what do I know? I'm not a rich child killer with lawyers hanging out my azz, so silly me.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  5. #161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wombat View Post
    By the way I love how the upper left-hand corners of the indictment pages show that the paper has been stapled, unstapled, and restapled quite a few times. Copies to Woody, Hal Haddon.... I wonder who else?
    On Peter Boyles' radio show a couple of days ago, which cynic posted the link to on his thread here, Dan Caplis said he was "contacted" and told by NO-ONE-HE-NAMED that the Grand Jury voted to indict, but Caplain was "sworn to secrecy" and couldn't even tell his wife.

    What? That's gossip, PURE AND SIMPLE, so why couldn't he tell his wife what "someone" told him about this case? These lawyers are all members of the same COVER-UP-THE-TRUTH Club.

    Caplis then goes on to recount "his" theory which he still believes--obviously based on the Grand Jury indictments as he knew them: there was a "third party" involved. He thinks that explains the DNA.

    HA HA HA HA! Clearly lawyers can't be bothered to think too much. They just swallow and repeat.

    Peter Boyles said right before Hunter's press conference when he told the world he would not indict the Ramseys...in so many words...Boyles saw LAWRENCE SCHILLER in the DA building hallway. Schiller told Boyles "THEY WERE WRITING UP THE INDICTMENTS." Boyles didn't define "They" so it could have been the Grand Jury or the DA, I guess.

    Then Hunter jumped ship. But clearly Larry Schiller KNEW the Grand Jury had indicted, though he said THE EXACTY OPPOSITE on TV and in his CROCUMENTARY.

    I can't believe I've been such a trusting person in my life. Clearly the entire world is filled with liars and deceivers who have no conscience or morals and will say anything for the right price or threat.

    Thank you, John Ramsey. You did change the way I get my news: WITH MY EYES OPENED TO YOU AND YOUR IMMORAL AND SELF-SERVING BASE LIFE-FORMS.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  6. #162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nickii View Post
    If Mr. Wood refers now to the DNA means to me, that Patsy and John did cover up for A NON FAMILY MEMBER!!! How crazy is that!!!!!
    Hey, they're posting some wild gossip at topix about this very thing.

    I'm talking insanity-level stuff.

    Enjoy, John Ramsey. See what you get when the truth won't do?

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  7. #163

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    Hello all! I haven't been posting lately but I have been reading here constantly. Just haven't had anything new to say lately.
    Until now, of course.
    I think what these documents are saying is the GJ thought one of the parents killed her and the other helped cover it up. They didn't know which one did the killing and which one helped cover it up, or they were split in the jury room over who did what. SO they instead indicted each of them for placing Jonbenet in a "situation which posed a threat of injury..which reuslted in death.." They were both indicted for that same thing. So obviously the GJ decided one of the parents killed her and the other one helped cover it up. Sorry, I'm being redundant. I don't see Burke as the accused murderer or having any involvement considered by the GJ anywhere here. I think the GJ is only pointing at the parents. The GJ indicted Patsy for placing Jonbenet in Johns care knowing she could get hurt or killed. The GJ indicted John for placing Jonbenet in Patsys care knowing she could get hurt or killed. The GJ indicted BOTH of them for covering up after she was hurt or killed, not knowing which one of them actually did it, or split over it, but convinced one of them did, so in other words, they covered all the bases. Do you all think I have this right?
    That's how I see it, Karen.

    Without being able to question John and Patsy--Hunter refused to subpoena them for the Grand Jury, apparently, the Grand Jury simply couldn't determine which one was the killer...or if both were.

    I think as I understand felony murder, both were.

    Didn't cynic go through this for us in detail here and at WS a while back?

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  8. #164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    That's how I see it, Karen.

    Without being able to question John and Patsy--Hunter refused to subpoena them for the Grand Jury, apparently, the Grand Jury simply couldn't determine which one was the killer...or if both were.

    I think as I understand felony murder, both were.

    Didn't cynic go through this for us in detail here and at WS a while back?
    Thank you for answering KoldKase. I don't know about cynics post but I will be on the hunt for it now. I have limited time online these days because of my job but I am really trying to keep up with this and stay informed of the latest. Thanks again KK!

  9. #165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    Thank you for answering KoldKase. I don't know about cynics post but I will be on the hunt for it now. I have limited time online these days because of my job but I am really trying to keep up with this and stay informed of the latest. Thanks again KK!
    Hey Karen,

    Here are a couple of posts:
    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...1&postcount=30
    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...d.php?p=193461

  10. #166

    Default

    I just read a comment on a news story about the release of the Grand Jury indictment, and it reminded me of something that we've discussed before and is important!

    "In her Sixty Minutes interview, Patsy Ramsey said, "There are only two people who know what really happened. The person that did it and whoever they confided to." I was amazed that no investigator picked up on that. How would she know the perpetrator confided in anyone?"

    If the perpetrator was Patsy, Burke or John, that makes sense. Otherwise, how WOULD Patsy know the perpetrator had confided to ANYONE?!!!

  11. #167
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    Good catch, C!

    Do you think Uncle Johnny has soaked through his Depends yet?

  12. #168
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    Hello all! I haven't been posting lately but I have been reading here constantly. Just haven't had anything new to say lately.
    Until now, of course.
    I think what these documents are saying is the GJ thought one of the parents killed her and the other helped cover it up. They didn't know which one did the killing and which one helped cover it up, or they were split in the jury room over who did what. SO they instead indicted each of them for placing Jonbenet in a "situation which posed a threat of injury..which reuslted in death.." They were both indicted for that same thing. So obviously the GJ decided one of the parents killed her and the other one helped cover it up. Sorry, I'm being redundant. I don't see Burke as the accused murderer or having any involvement considered by the GJ anywhere here. I think the GJ is only pointing at the parents. The GJ indicted Patsy for placing Jonbenet in Johns care knowing she could get hurt or killed. The GJ indicted John for placing Jonbenet in Patsys care knowing she could get hurt or killed. The GJ indicted BOTH of them for covering up after she was hurt or killed, not knowing which one of them actually did it, or split over it, but convinced one of them did, so in other words, they covered all the bases. Do you all think I have this right?
    You have to read the Kolar book. He saw ALL of the case files and he drew the conclusion that Burke WAS involved. He's the most recent set of eyes on the case, and the fact that Mary Lacey shut him down as soon as he told her what he'd found, tells me he was on the right track. Whether the GJ saw that too - I think they did but they could not file murder charges on him. So they did what they could with what they had left.

    Please, anyone who hasn't read it, get a copy of this book and read it.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!



Similar Threads

  1. Ramsey grand jury voted to indict parents in 1999, DA refused to prosecute!
    By BobC in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 146
    Last Post: November 7, 2016, 6:48 pm, Mon Nov 7 18:48:57 UTC 2016
  2. The Grand Jury indictment of John and Patsy Ramsey
    By cynic in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: August 3, 2016, 11:36 am, Wed Aug 3 11:36:47 UTC 2016
  3. Judge Who Dismissed JonBenet Ramsey Grand Jury To Retire
    By Little in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 7, 2009, 2:49 pm, Fri Aug 7 14:49:57 UTC 2009
  4. Grand Jury is NOT looking into anything Ramsey
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 4, 2004, 9:33 pm, Fri Jun 4 21:33:19 UTC 2004

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •